The same I think about people who can’t shut up about atheism. Fucking fanatics with nothing going on in their lives.

What a weird comment.

No.

You aren’t looking for a country, you’re looking a dream.

NGL if the government makes an error in your favor they should just write it off and print the equivalent amount of new money.

Did you? Did you read the article? Lol

Dude they didn’t break the ice to explore. They are exploring because the ice itself has receded due to climate change.

The ice that gets broken by icebreakers is the frozen surface ice, not the glaciers.

Yep. This was long due.

They are sold for LLM training sets.

Fr. Witch hunting over fucking nothing.

What? There’s naked yoga on YouTube, more NSFW than that?

We really need some better quality reporting instead of this slop.

Where do you think the bodies go when families can no longer pay the graveyard for their spot in the dirt?

Don’t worry I had AI TL&DR it for you:

Summary of “The Reverse-Centaur’s Guide to Criticizing AI”

Cory Doctorow distinguishes between centaurs (humans assisted by machines) and reverse-centaurs (humans serving as appendages to machines). His core thesis: AI tools are marketed as centaur-making devices but deployed to create reverse-centaurs—workers subjected to algorithmic control and expected to catch machine errors while being blamed for failures.

The AI bubble exists primarily to maintain growth stock valuations. Once tech monopolies dominate their sectors, they face market reclassification from “growth” to “mature” stocks, triggering massive valuation drops. AI hype keeps investors convinced of continued expansion potential.

AI’s actual business model: Replace high-wage workers (coders, radiologists, illustrators) with AI systems that cannot actually perform those jobs, while retaining skeleton crews as “accountability sinks”—humans blamed when AI fails. This strategy reduces payroll while maintaining superficial human oversight.

Why expanding copyright won’t help creators: Despite 50 years of copyright expansion, creative workers earn less both absolutely and proportionally while media conglomerates profit enormously. New training-related copyrights would simply become contractual obligations to employers, not worker protections.

The effective counter-strategy: The U.S. Copyright Office’s position that AI-generated works cannot receive copyright protection undermines corporate incentives to replace human creators entirely. Combined with sectoral bargaining rights (allowing industry-wide worker negotiations), this creates material resistance to worker displacement.

On AI art specifically: Generative systems produce “eerie” outputs—superficially competent but communicatively hollow. They cannot transfer the “numinous, irreducible feeling” that defines art because they possess no intentionality beyond statistical word/pixel prediction.

The bubble will collapse, leaving behind useful commodity tools (transcription, image processing) while eliminating economically unsustainable foundation models. Effective criticism should target AI’s material drivers—the growth-stock imperative and labor displacement economics—not peripheral harms like deepfakes or “AI safety” concerns about sentience.

No one shoots themselves in the foot hoping to claim health insurance. Use your brain.

Wtf is this conversation, half of these replies read like AI slop.

Some of their comments are comically contrarian lol. This is really the Lemmy experience nowadays.

Careful bro you’re making it sound like exploitation has been normalized in the name of ‘free software’, but actually… Oh wait.

But I was told by pirate software that this was impossible and would devastated the gaming industry.

Then they cut staff anyways, because why leave free money on the table?